A common misconception out there is that you must punch or strike someone to qualify for criminal assault. This is simply not the case. As strange as it sounds squirting breast milk at someone can qualify as criminal assault because all that is necessary is that an actor makes contact with someone. The contact can be with your fist, a weapon, or in this case bodily fluid. To make matters worse, this woman assaulted a police officer, which usually carries a stiffer penalty than if she had done this to her neighbor or co-worker. While, Kentucky is a different jurisdiction than New Jersey of course, the laws are most likely similar in dealing with assault on law enforcement officers. This will be a rather expensive legal lesson for this Kentucky woman, but a good tutorial for everyone else out there. Remember when you are around police officers keep your hands, feet, and breast milk to yourself, and always retain an attorney if your behavior has been perceived as an assault.

During the late summer of 2009, a Reno casino employee accused Roethlisberger of sexual assault for an alleged incident that occurred in 2008. This woman filed a civil law suit in attempt to get money from Big Ben. This is much different matter. A woman claims she was assault last night and has filed criminal charges with local police in Georgia.

Naturally, this matter is in infancy, but the first few hours are critical in a sexual assault criminal investigation. Here reports indicate that the victim has already gone to the hospital where an forensic evidence will be gathered and she has told her story to police. The two-time Super Bowl champion QB will also be questioned, and he can choose to either refuse or answer the questions. Regardless of guilt or innocence, it is generally advised not to answer questions without a lawyer present.

As the police continue to gather information, it is important to remember that is an ongoing investigation. The fact that someone brought charges does not mean the police have to follow through with them. Rather the police must investigate the matter and if they find probable cause that alleged assault occurred then they can filed chargers against the Steelers QB.

While this story leaps of the page due to the "shock value" the case may still be a difficult for prosecutor's to prove based on the facts that have been publicized. This case ultimately comes down to the credibility of both the victim and the attorney. This is because the attorney's defense is not a denial that sexual acts occurred, but rather that the sexual acts were consensual. The fact that Judge is allowing three witnesses to testify appears to undermine the defense. Witness testimony like this can backfire, though, because the defense may argue that the victim in this case was accepting the attorney's offer. However, the fact that the attorney was allegedly using narcotics really damages the attorney's image for the jury. The jury is going to have to weigh the evidence, and the drug use may be a factor is convincing a jury that the attorney did sexually assault the victim and that there was no consent. An experienced attorney can determine the strongest defense against these types of charges, with extremely sensitive and nebulous circumstances, based upon the specific facts of each individual case.

In addition to the State trial, Garcia has been convicted in Federal Court as well for distribution of cocaine and methamphetamine, though the State jury will not know this, at least until the trial is over. Regardless of the outcome of the state trial, Garcia faces attorney discipline including potential disbarment. His law license has already been suspended, and he will probably be looking for a new line of work. The only question is whether he'll have a stopover in the state prison.

Mr. Holyfield, according to the order, is not to be within 500 yards of Mrs. Holyfield, 30 years of age, and their 6 year-old son and 5 year-old daughter, until a February 18th hearing. His third wife, Mrs. Holyfield states that emotional abuse started soon after their marriage, and that emotional and physical abuse have been escalating since then. Publicly, however, they remain steadfastly devoted to each other and their marriage.

In New Jersey, domestic violence is one person's attempt to control another via harmful acts, be they physical, sexual, emotional or verbal, with whom he or she has had a "dating" relationship, though it could be a parent or caretaker. So those who are or were dating, are or were married, have shared or share living quarters fall under the requirements. "Harmful" could include criminal acts from false imprisonment to stalking to criminal trespass. To get a "TRO" or protective order, an alleged victim files a complaint with the family division of Superior Court, where a judge will consider the history of domestic violence, whether or not the victim is in immediate danger, and what measures will sufficiently protect him or her. This is a civil legal action, but a criminal complaint may be filed as well, and once a TRO is filed the alleged abuser can be held in criminal contempt for violating it. Because it is temporary, a TRO is fairly easily obtained from the Court.

A hearing is held ten days later for the judge to determine if a final restraining order, or FRO, is warranted, and for how long. At a final hearing, both parties may speak, and offer evidence and question witnesses on the record. Therefore, of course, it is important to have the aid of an attorney if at all possible, in order to protect your rights. The boxer may be trying to exercise control over Mrs. Holyfield, and their money, and at the time of filing she had a problem with it. She claimed that he choked her in front of their daughter and that he hit her in front of their children. Later, she released a statement saying that Mr. Holyfield "has many qualities and characteristics that [she] admires and respects. We are all human." Of course, the legal system will be there for her should she determine that such behavior towards herself and around her children is not human.

Further, "exigent circumstances" is a narrowly construed exception, in the medical sense. The medical emergency exigency test is met upon "a prudent and reasonably based belief that there is a potential medical emergency of unknown dimension." State v. Castro, 238 N.J.Super. 482, 489 (App. Div. 1990). In State v. Scott, 231 N.J.Super. 258, 275 (App. Div. 1989)(Ashbey, J., dissenting), rev'd on dissent below 118 N.J. 406 (1990), the court articulated the three elements to the emergency-aid exception: (1) the existence of an emergency as viewed objectively; (2) a search not motivated by a desire to find evidence; and (3) a nexus between the search and the emergency were satisfied by the facts of the case. The circumstances should present "sufficient exigency created by the information imparted ... to justify immediate action by [the officer], as distinct from retreating and initiating warrant procedures." State v. Castro, supra, 238 N.J.Super. at 487. That should make the average person feel a little better.

These principals are important to know if a police officer knocks on your door because it is the only way you can protect your rights. After the fact, an attorney can help sort through the details to determine the best criminal defense.

One such exception is the "protective sweep." In Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990), the Unites States Supreme Court determined the circumstances under which the police may perform a warrantless protective sweep of a defendant's premises incident to an arrest in order to ascertain the presence of any dangerous third parties. The Court held that the Fourth Amendment permits a properly limited protective sweep in conjunction with an in-home arrest when the searching officer possesses a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene. Id. at 327, 334, 337. Such a protective sweep is not a full search of the premises, but may extend only to a cursory inspection of those spaces where a person may be found. Id. at 335. The sweep is to last no longer than is necessary to dispel the reasonable suspicion of danger and in any event no longer than it takes to complete the arrest and depart the premises. Id. at 336. Thus an officer's search for contraband or other evidence incident to an arrest does not constitute a protective sweep, and therefore cannot be based upon merely a reasonable suspicion.

New Jersey also has addressed protective sweeps. In State v. Henry, 133 N.J. 104, 118 (1993), the Court held that upon arresting an individual, "[t]he police may also 'fan out' and conduct a protective sweep of the area if they have reason to believe that they may be in danger from other parties on the premises." In State v. Doyle, 42 N.J. 334 (1964), the New Jersey Supreme Court found that the key to the propriety of a search is when the defendant was arrested. Police may not search in order to arrest, and a search to uncover evidence upon which to arrest is not made lawful because the desired evidence is obtained. Id. at 342. Absent a valid search warrant, the police must actually perform a valid arrest at same time that they performed the search that police justify as incident to an arrest. Id. at 342-43.

It is important to note that the scope of the sweep is a crucial factor. In Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969), the Court held that in the absence of a search warrant, the justifiable search incident to an in-home arrest could not extend beyond the arrestee's person and the area from within which he might have obtained a weapon. A search of a person or things within his immediate control or of the place of arrest to the extent that it is within his immediate possession or control is considered incidental to the arrest. Doyle, supra, 42 N.J. at 344. If police fish around beyond the area where a person might be able to reach, for example, evidence they find is not permissible in Court. Police then arguably must be able to convince the court that the evidence of danger was in reach. The experience of a police search and seizure at the home can be overwhelming, which is why these facts are best examined by a skilled attorney in order to determine the best defense strategy.

In other words, the Court assumes that entry without a warrant is barred, and the burden is on the state to prove that the police had an urgency reason that prevented the ability to first obtain a warrant. If they cannot, any type of evidence obtained as a result of that entry will not be permitted to be relied upon at trial (fruit of the poisonous tree).

For example, in State v. Holland, 328 N.J.Super. 1 (App. Div. 2000), the officers conducted a warrantless search of a residence based upon the smell of burning marijuana emanating from the home. The average person would assume that the police could use that scent to generate probable cause. Probable cause should justify a warrant, not warrantless entry or entry without consent. If the suspect voluntarily permitted the police in, or if the suspect voluntarily left the home, that is a different legal situation. In this instance, relying upon several rulings of the United States Supreme Court which stress the sanctity of a person's home, the Holland Court found that there was probable cause to believe someone possessed marijuana, which is a disorderly persons offense, but the minor offense did not generate the exigent circumstances which would justify a warrantless search or arrest in the suspect's home. 328 N.J.Super. at 7. In that type of situation, anything the police found or were told when they entered the home without consent that would incriminate a suspect is barred.

The Judge denied her youthful offender status and imposed a 6-month jail sentence reportedly because he had seen a picture she posted of herself on Facebook. The photograph was taken of her one month after the crash, and she posted it captioned "drunk in Florida." She could have gotten as much as 4 years in state prison, but the Judge reportedly felt forced to consider her young age and clear history.

Her drivers license is revoked, and following her jail sentence, she will be under electronic home monitoring for one year and on probation for five, during which she is not allowed to drink under its terms.

A judge wants to see a remorseful defendant regardless of the crimes he or she has been charged with or found guilty of, and evidence to the contrary is extremely damaging. The Judge is free to consider all factors that have any arguable relevance. Every defendant should keep in mind that the Judge wants to see that his or her encounter with the criminal justice system has taught a lesson and changed his or her behavior for the better. The Internet has created a new environment in which to evaluate a defendant's behavior, and it is completely public. There is a new way we are all being held accountable for our behavior, and the legal profession is aware, that is nothing new. The consequences can clearly be harsh, and it is yet another lesson young adults have to learn.

According to reports, he had a blood alcohol content of .157, admitted to having six drinks, and failed field sobriety tests. He had bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and was visibly unsteady. His first arrest was in 2005 on charges of misdemeanor battery, after he got in a fight at a party as a college freshman. Upon agreeing to community service, counseling and attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, the charges were dismissed.

It is unclear how police connected the football player to the car after the fact. This continues a trend of Cincinnati Bengals players that have been arrested in past years. Under New Jersey law, even if the police do not see the accident in progress, police can arrest someone after the fact if the officer can trace the car to the driver, and the driver is intoxicated. In this case it appears that happened and Maualuga was visibly intoxicated so he was charged. An experienced, skilled attorney can analyze the circumstances of a case like this to determine how to best defend against these types of subsequent charges.

Charges of DUI, drug possession, dealing, possession of a loaded weapon without a permit, resisting arrest and public intoxication carry serious penalties in every state, including New Jersey. This is quite a fall from Terry's football days. He attended the University of Georgia, and played for the Carolina Panthers, the Seattle Seahawks, and most recently, the Kansas City Chiefs in 2006 and 2007. It was reported that the Chiefs cut him for being absent from team meetings in 2007. The NFL suspended him from the 2008 season for substance abuse, after already having been suspended in 2003 drugs and a domestic dispute. Domestic violence and drugs are a common pair, and they should be taken very seriously.

In New Jersey, cocaine is considered a "Controlled Dangerous Substance," or CDS. As one example, this felony possession charge could lead to up to 5 years in jail and remain on your record permanently. If it is your first offense, you could be eligible for the Pretrial Intervention program, which can lead to a dismissal of charges after 1 year. One way to defend against charges of this nature is to question the method of the police search and seizure, or how the cocaine was discovered. The specific facts of the arrest are crucial in determining the best legal course of action.

If you have been involved in domestic violence, or charged with DUI, drug possession charges, weapons charges, or any of these crimes, it is crucial that you call an attorney immediately. Experienced attorneys can be reached at Chamlin, Rosen, Uliano and Witherington.

The incident that led to these charges, of course, was punching a pal of fellow professional athlete, NBA Cavalier LeBron James, outside of a nightclub, while he was still a Cleveland Brown. He became a New York Jet player two days later. Judge Michelle Earley ruled that Edwards receive a $1000.00 fine, a 180-day suspended jail sentence, and that he be placed on inactive probation, meaning that he is not required to appear before a probation officer. Thankfully, his criminal record is otherwise clear, and though NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell could suspend him, an additional fine from the NFL is more likely disciplinary action.

In general, disorderly conduct charges usually provoke some sort of social disturbance, like fighting, public drunkenness, loitering, using loud and offensive language publicly, or somehow disturbing the peace. While in and of itself, disorderly conduct is not widely considered very serious, depending upon the circumstances and degree, jail time, community service and fines are all possible outcomes. Further, a disorderly conduct conviction could jeopardize your results if charged with any subsequent crimes.

Misdemeanors are usually low levels of crime convictions that carry less severe punishments, though jail time and heavy fines are certainly among the penalties. Misdemeanor charges are often included with more significant felony charges as a prosecutorial strategy. The facts and surrounding circumstances of your case determine what the prosecutor will charge and whether or not you may be convicted of a lesser charge or not.

Edwards initially pleaded "Not Guilty" and then changed his plea to "No Contest." In New Jersey, you may plead "Guilty," "Not Guilty," "No Contest" or "Mute" plea. Edwards, by doing so, acknowledged the charge but avoided admitting any guilt of the accused charge. There are pros and cons to each plea, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the accused, that may have a long term impact on your criminal record as well as your vulnerability to civil litigation.

Edwards is lucky in that his record is otherwise clean and it bodes well if in fact he wants to stay with the Jets. If you find yourself facing any charges like these, contact Chamlin, Rosen, Uliano & Witherington to ensure you go into Court prepared with the best legal representation possible.

On Monday, the chronically or terminally ill in New Jersey came a step closer to finding relief in cannabis, legally anyway, with medical marijuana. Outgoing Governor Corzine stated that he would sign the bill approved by the legislature before he left office. Soon-to-be Governor Christie has given his support to the bill publicly, though he had a concern for loopholes that may be exploited for the purposes of drug abuse. The federal government, according to what Attorney General Eric Holder has been reported as stating, would not prosecute those who are abiding by medical marijuana laws of the state.

The requirements for New Jersey's version of the medical marijuana law is strict, including that patients have chronic pain, wasting syndrome, or 12 months or less to live if a physician determines that the illness is terminal. In addition, only specific illnesses or debilitating medical conditions qualify, including AIDS, multiple sclerosis and certain kinds of cancer. Patients with the selected diseases would be given an identification card permitting them to obtain 2 ounces of marijuana each month from dispensaries sanctioned by the state.

Marijuana legalization on the whole is no closer to reality, however. The current marijuana laws, presumably, would remain in place. While the lowest marijuana law is a disorderly persons offense, possession of less than 50 grams or merely being under the influence of marijuana is punishable by up to 6 months jail time and a $1,000.00 fine. If you are found to have more than 50 grams, that increases to 18 months and a $25,000.00 fine. Possession of paraphernalia alone can get you 6 months and $1,000.00. Distribution of less than one ounce can put you in jail for 18 months as well, and paying a $10,000.00 fine, while more than one ounce increases the jail time to 3 to 5 years and a $25,000.00 fine. If distribution within 1000 feet of a school bus or school property, or near public housing, public park or public building, or sale to a minor or pregnant woman is proven, these factors will significantly increase penalties and make some incarceration and fines mandatory.

Make no mistake: For the foreseeable future, marijuana is far from being legalized, outside of a narrow medical purpose. Be sure to know your rights.

If you have been arrested for any drug related offense, or have questions regarding this area of the law, call Chamlin, Rosen, Uliano & Witherington for a consultation right away.

While New Jersey does not have a Leandra's Law, a driver who is drunk or under the influence of any drug that can alter one's ability to operate a vehicle and has minor passengers can be charged with additional crimes, including endangering the welfare of a minor, a disorderly persons offense, in addition to the motor vehicle offense of DWI, for which no jury trial is permitted. No plea bargaining is allowed, though each charge must be proven in court, and the conviction on your record is permanent. Once convicted, drunk drivers of children will receive more jail time than those who did not drunk drive with children in the car.

If you find yourself in this position, it is important that you contact an attorney immediately. For more information, see the attorneys at Chamlin, Rosen, Uliano & Witherington, who can help assess the details associated with your case.

At age 26, Henry had a history of arrests, including gun, marijuana possession, and assault charges. The Bengals gave him a break after a rough career at West Virginia under then Coach Rich Rodriguez. At his worst, he was called "an embarrassment to himself and the program," and "a one-man crime wave." He had been suspended by the NFL three times, released and then resigned for another chance to "regroup, catch himself, and re-start his life." Recently, despite being plagued by injuries including a dislocated forearm, he was turning things around. Those around him were both proud and hopeful, saying that "When you see him up close, you'll find that you'll like him," that he "has done everything he can to make himself a better person" and is "a great kid with a great heart."

One doesn't have to dig deep to find a cautionary tale for college athletes, for those embroiled in domestic disputes (Steve McNair's death is also tied to trouble with a mistress girlfriend), for those involved with drugs on any level, and even for dangerous driving (how often do people get behind the wheel when they are upset or following a heated argument).

The legal penalties for all of this behavior quickly pile up, and can have a seriously negative impact on your life, whether you are an athlete or not. Costly fines, loss of drivers license, jail time and mandated community service and treatment programs are all possibilities, depending upon you are caught on a first, second or third offense, or the particular circumstances surrounding the incident. It is too bad that successful athletes who make the most of the opportunities that come their way, and who manage to make good choices do not make the headlines.